• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Wikileaks DNC leak proves primary was rigged /DNC planned to use Sanders' religion ag

Yep SHOCKER!:dl::dl::dl:

Got three this time! Good showing!
OK, I admit you got me. I had no idea that's what you were talking about because it is such a ridiculous thing to call people out for. I do hope she is an atheist and I don't blame her for lying about it if she is. If I had an ambition to be a politician, I would lie about it too.
 
Why do the Wikileaks fanboys have nothing to say about the fact that they exposed personal info (social security and credit card numbers)?
 
Security experts say that Russia is behind the hacks. Hmm, it couldn't because they want Donald Trump to win could it?
 
Why do the Wikileaks fanboys have nothing to say about the fact that they exposed personal info (social security and credit card numbers)?

Cowards, scum suckers and weasels all - though that is probably unfair to weasels.......
 
Security experts say that Russia is behind the hacks. Hmm, it couldn't because they want Donald Trump to win could it?

If Russia hacked the DNC email server and was reading and downloading its traffic for over a year, what odds would you give that they hacked Hillary's email server?
 
That's because a lot of Democrats don't vote in mid term elections.

And that is damned stupid of them and it's a good part of the problem (besides the election/voter suppression/ frauds of the republickers over the past several election)s.
 
Last edited:
And that is damned stupid of them and it's a good part (besides the election/voter suppression/ frauds of the republickers over the past several elections.
And then they complain that the country is not progressive enough. Yeah, because you dumbasses allowed Republicans to take Congress.
 
I am fully capable of deciding my feelings on the email in question without having to be told why that email was released to me. That is my point.
You, or anyone else, is fully capable of falling for the false narrative being promoted by Putin and Assange, yes. Hopefully, you are also capable of realizing that they are manipulating you. Sadly, not everyone is able to see how people without good intentions can present one side of a story in order to make people pick an outcome that is worse for themselves.
 
You, or anyone else, is fully capable of falling for the false narrative being promoted by Putin and Assange, yes. Hopefully, you are also capable of realizing that they are manipulating you. Sadly, not everyone is able to see how people without good intentions can present one side of a story in order to make people pick an outcome that is worse for themselves.

What is the other side of the story? Suppose Putin and/or Assange were completely objective. What's missing?
 
I am fully capable of deciding my feelings on the email in question without having to be told why that email was released to me. That is my point.


Help me understand why one DNC staffer suggesting in an email that someone might ask Sanders about his religious beliefs is such a heinous transgression.

It might may no difference, but for KY and WVA can we get someone to ask his belief. Does he believe in a God. He had skated on saying he has a Jewish heritage. I think I read he is an atheist.
Even if someone had actually done it, which they didn't.

Since when has asking a political candidate about their religious beliefs been forbidden territory?

Conservatives generally don't even bother with the asking part. They prefer to tell people what a politician's religious beliefs are, especially if it is derogatory. Whether it's true or not. They do it all the time. Where did so many people develop the conviction that Obama is a Moslem, even though he goes to Christian churches and asserts quite persuasively that he is a Christian?

How come merely asking got to be such a transgression?

Is there more than one standard involved here?

It's okay for everyone else and their brother, on both sides of the aisle, to routinely ask pols about their faith, but when one DNC flack even mentions the possibility in a friggin' email of asking Bernie it's some sort of major ethical violation?
 
I think there needs to be much more focus on this.

I'm saddened at the lack of outrage over the privacy violations. The DNC isn't the government, it's a private entity. No matter how much "fun" it might be, I can't condone this massive privacy breach. One assumes Assange public PGP key is on wikileaks because he values his privacy, just not other peoples privacy. Presumably becuase he's a hypocritical *******.

If you value your privacy and yet you're here reading these emails and endorsing this privacy breach, you too may be a hypocritical *******.

I can't get too outraged at the violation of the privacy of a private entity that chooses to meddle in politics
 
I can't get too outraged at the violation of the privacy of a private entity that chooses to meddle in politics

Privacy is privacy. The DNC is actually in the business of politics. Why would you say they "choose to meddle". Meddling would seem to be what Assange and Wikileaks are doing. Selective meddling. Accusing a "national committee" of an organization that IS politics of "meddling in politics" seems quite desperate.

I'd also kinda like to see the RNC emails between the non-partisan Benghazi committee and the RNC chairs. Would that be interesting? Enquirer minds want to know.
 
Help me understand why one DNC staffer suggesting in an email that someone might ask Sanders about his religious beliefs is such a heinous transgression.

Even if someone had actually done it, which they didn't.

Since when has asking a political candidate about their religious beliefs been forbidden territory?

Conservatives generally don't even bother with the asking part. They prefer to tell people what a politician's religious beliefs are, especially if it is derogatory. Whether it's true or not. They do it all the time. Where did so many people develop the conviction that Obama is a Moslem, even though he goes to Christian churches and asserts quite persuasively that he is a Christian?

How come merely asking got to be such a transgression?

Is there more than one standard involved here?

It's okay for everyone else and their brother, on both sides of the aisle, to routinely ask pols about their faith, but when one DNC flack even mentions the possibility in a friggin' email of asking Bernie it's some sort of major ethical violation?

Asking about a candidate's religious stuff should be forbidden. It has NO legal bearing on anything (nor should it)!!!!!!
 
Asking about a candidate's religious stuff should be forbidden. It has NO legal bearing on anything (nor should it)!!!!!!

When being "a good Christian" is mandatory in a certain party? You and I and other secularists may prefer that it's not an issue, but it certainly is one. It's a flat-out requirement with a certain sector of the electorate.

There are a lot of indications that Hillary's a Christian. But those indications don't show up in her discussions of laws and programs. I'm quite content to stay with the Constitution... It doesn't matter what or even if she believes. It doesn't matter that JFK was a Catholic or the Bernie's Jewish. Their faith does not permeate their views and proposals.

Unlike a certain other party.
 
Julian Assange - First Interview Following Wikileaks DNC Email Release

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange joined Democracy Now on Monday from London after the release of nearly 20,000 DNC emails revealing how the Democratic Party favored Hillary Clinton and worked behind the scenes to discredit and defeat Bernie Sanders. On Sunday Democrat Party Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz resigned after the Wikileaks DNC document dump. Assange commented as follows:

"Hillary Clinton immediately put out a statement, within hours, saying that Debbie Wasserman Schultz is a great friend, and she’s incorporating her into her campaign, she’s going to be pushing for her re-election to the Congress.

"So that’s a very interesting signaling by Hillary Clinton that if you act in a corrupt way that benefits Hillary Clinton, you will be taken care of. But it’s a very destructive signal for a future presidency, because it’s—effectively, it’s expanding the Overton window of corruption. It doesn’t really matter what you do, how you behave; as long as that is going to benefit Hillary Clinton, you’ll be protected."​

Read more:
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...-following-wikileaks-dnc-email-release-video/ (July 25, 2016)


Julian Assange has repeatedly claimed that there are more emails to come, and to expect an October surprise. Incriminating emails involving donations to the Clinton Foundation by foreign governments in exchange for influence and favors from Hillary Clinton while she was serving as Secretary of State.
 
Julian Assange has repeatedly claimed that there are more emails to come, and to expect an October surprise. Incriminating emails involving donations to the Clinton Foundation by foreign governments in exchange for influence and favors from Hillary Clinton while she was serving as Secretary of State.
When they don't materialize, will you admit that he is a liar?
 

Back
Top Bottom